Parser not recovering properly from broken contract

[beta-ziliani]

The following file generates just one ContractDefinition node, when there should be two.

contract A {
  public function // missing the rest...
}

contract B {
  public function // missing the rest...
}

Current output:

Tree:
  - (ContractDefinition): # "contract A {\n  public function // missing the rest..." (0..113)
      - (contract_keyword꞉ ContractKeyword): "contract" # (0..8)
      - (leading_trivia꞉ Whitespace): " " # (8..9)
      - (name꞉ Identifier): "A" # (9..10)
      - (leading_trivia꞉ Whitespace): " " # (10..11)
      - (open_brace꞉ OpenBrace): "{" # (11..12)
      - (trailing_trivia꞉ EndOfLine): "\n" # (12..13)
      - (members꞉ ContractMembers): [] # (13..13)
      - (leading_trivia꞉ Whitespace): "  " # (13..15)
      - (UNRECOGNIZED): "public function // missing the rest...\n" # (15..54)
      - (close_brace꞉ CloseBrace): "}" # (54..55)
      - (trailing_trivia꞉ EndOfLine): "\n" # (55..56)
      - (leading_trivia꞉ EndOfLine): "\n" # (56..57)
      - (UNRECOGNIZED): "contract B {\n  public function // missing the rest..." # (57..113)

Note that also the first function is not parsed as such.

Originally found in collaboration with @OmarTawfik in #1172 (comment)

[AntonyBlakey]

I don't think this should be an issue. Trying to apply this form of reasoning to error recovery is a entire rabbit warren of distractions. I think you are judging this on the basis of what you know the user intended, which of course the parser does not.

Making this work in the general case requires a different set of tradeoffs in the parser, and making it work in the specific case really is whack-a-mole.